Export limit exceeded: 16150 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (417953 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-104310 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 4.3 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104312 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 3.5 Low |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to produce a server-generated ZIP archive containing entry paths that traverse outside the intended extraction directory. Extraction of the archive by a victim using a non-sanitizing tool could result in arbitrary file write on the victim's host. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104314 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow an authenticated attacker with a read or share grant on a target flow to retrieve the flow owner's stored third-party credentials in cleartext from the API response. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104315 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 4.3 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104316 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to cancel any victim's running background workflow job by sending a single HTTP request, resulting in loss of in-progress compute work with no flow-level permission check. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104328 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104331 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 5.4 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks. | ||||
| CVE-2026-104339 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 9.8 Critical |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107328 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 9.9 Critical |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of code in eval/exec. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110190 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow an authenticated user to traverse directories on the system. An attacker could send a specially crafted URL request to view arbitrary files on the system. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110192 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110193 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote attacker with a low-privileged authenticated account to cause the Agentic Assistant to generate or submit component code using these unblocked patterns, resulting in arbitrary operating system command execution on the server. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110200 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext storage of sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110244 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110245 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper authentication. | ||||
| CVE-2026-107682 | 1 Adobe | 2 Adobe Experience Manager, Experience Manager | 2026-10-30 | 5.4 Medium |
| Adobe Experience Manager is affected by a DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. An attacker could exploit this issue by manipulating the DOM environment to execute malicious JavaScript within the context of the victim's browser. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must visit a crafted webpage. Scope is changed. | ||||
| CVE-2026-110309 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper control of code generation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18894 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote attacker to trigger pre-existing stored Python component code in a public workflow, executing it under the flow owner's runtime context within the server process. This bypasses the intended trust boundary where public execution paths are restricted to server-trusted component code. | ||||
| CVE-2026-77817 | 2 Ibm, Langflow | 2 Langflow Oss, Langflow | 2026-10-30 | 6.5 Medium |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper sanitization of secrets during flow and project exports. | ||||
| CVE-2026-99202 | 1 Linux | 2 Linux, Linux Kernel | 2026-10-30 | 4.1 Medium |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: libsas: Fix SMP IO deadlock during HA resume smp_execute_task_sg() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() on the host before issuing an SMP command. When that command is itself issued from the HA resume path, the get_sync() deadlocks: it waits for the ongoing resume (the device is RPM_RESUMING), while the resume is blocked in sas_drain_work() waiting for that same SMP IO to complete. The deadlock needs an expander-attached SATA disk. During sas_resume_ha() -> sas_drain_work(), DISCE_RESUME -> sas_resume_sata() -> ata_sas_port_resume() requests ATA_EH_RESET, and the hard reset for such a disk is done via SMP PHY CONTROL (sas_ata_hard_reset() -> sas_phy_reset() -> sas_smp_phy_control() -> smp_execute_task_sg()). Direct-attached SATA resets through lldd_control_phy() and SSP devices use TMFs, so neither hits this. Replace the get_sync()/put_sync() pair with pm_runtime_get_noresume()/pm_runtime_put(). smp_execute_task_sg() only needs to hold off autosuspend while the SMP is in flight, and it must not try to resume the host: a sync resume issued from the HA resume path itself is what deadlocks, and by the time sas_resume_ha() runs, hw_init has already reinitialized the hardware, so the device is accessible without one. The usage reference is still required. Discovery work normally runs inside an event worker's PM reference, taken at sas_notify_port_event() notify time and held until the handler has flushed the disco queue. sas_rediscover_ex_phy() however requeues DISCE_REVALIDATE_DOMAIN from within the revalidation worker itself, and flush_workqueue() does not wait for work items queued during execution, so that chained revalidation runs with no outer PM reference - without the get_noresume(), its SMP could race autosuspend. For the BSG path, sas_smp_handler() is the only caller which may find the host autosuspended: expander SMP requests do not go through any SCSI device request queue, so nothing else in that path holds the host awake. Resume it there with pm_runtime_resume_and_get() and check the result. | ||||